Students are out of pocket after buying essential tech

Under the Office for Students (OfS) regulatory condition B2 students, should have access to appropriate hardware, software, and technical infrastructure, including decent wifi, at no extra cost.

Concerningly, qualitative comments in a new Jisc survey suggest these conditions are only sometimes being met. One student was concerned about the “extortionate costs” for subscriptions for digital tools that they said were “mandatory” for their degree.

It’s clear there is still work to ensure students have equitable access to the tools they need to complete their studies. Students said they expected access to the technologies they required for no extra cost and were frustrated when this was not the case.

While on-campus provision could mitigate some issues, it was not always available at the time needed, or there was pressure on finite resources, the specialist labs were not open long enough and the software needed available on all computers, or there were fewer available than demand required.

Some also said that they didn’t discover free software packages offered until very late in their studies (as late as year three), suggesting there is work to be done in making students’ rights clear to them from the outset.

The data comes from insights gathered by Jisc in the 2022-23 academic year, and published in a spotlight report last week on how students may experience digital poverty while studying.

Most respondents (67 per cent) were home-domiciled students, almost a third were international (30 per cent) and three per cent were transnational students.

When asked what type of devices students regularly used while learning, most said they used a combination of devices, with the majority having a laptop (94 per cent) or a desktop computer (27 per cent) available for learning. 71 per cent of students used a smartphone and just over a quarter (26 per cent) used a tablet.

There was little variation between UK and international students, students of different ethnicities, and ages, and whether or not they reported having a disability. However, there were some variations between genders.

Men were more likely to use additional screens and microphones or headsets than other genders and were also more likely to use a desktop computer than women – 37 per cent of men vs 21 per cent of women.

When asked whether they were given, loaned, or helped to buy devices there was little variation between all demographics. Higher use of desktop computers and peripherals by men may be because of preference rather than an inability to obtain those devices.

There were disparities between needing support and being offered support across all demographics: of those who required support less than half (43 per cent) were offered it. Mature students, Asian and international students were more likely to need support than the overall average.

There were also concerning differences in experiences amongst demographics in terms of being offered support if they needed it. Black students said they were not offered as much support (thirty-four percent) compared to the overall average. White and Asian students were significantly more likely to be offered support (45 and 43 per cent respectively) than black students.

When asked where they tended to use technology to assist their learning, mature students and black students were also more likely to learn at work than other students.

Such disparities may come down to student perception of what help is available – but for those in England writing Access and Participation plans, it may be worth considering how digital poverty could impact some students in different ways.

Students also said that poor wifi connection on and off campus was the most common barrier to what may have made it difficult for them to use digital technologies in their learning.

About a third of students (34 per cent) struggled with mobile data costs, especially off campus. Many students also had no private area to work both on and off campus and concerningly almost a fifth (19 per cent) had no safe area to work.

International students, Asian students, and black students were more likely to be concerned about mobile data costs than the UK average. Again, worryingly, over a quarter (27 per cent) had no suitable computer or device.

In the free text comments, students referred to the benefits of being able to join classes virtually or watch pre-recorded content because it helped them cut travel costs or take on an additional shift of paid work they may not otherwise have been able to do if attending class.

There’s a conversation to be had about what extent students can be “full time” students. It seems students still feel that digital learning hinges on being able to afford the necessary equipment, wifi, privacy, and a suitable environment in which to study. Few would argue that watching a lecture on a crowded bus on a mobile phone is an effective way to study.